No, you're not, which was my point. I believe you to be more than intelligent enough to make your own decisions, for better or worse.FatherTed wrote:
):
AussieReaper wrote:
Jay doesn't believe in the greater good.
"The greater good."
If children are the property of their parents why is there any argument over abortion?On the one hand I feel that children are rightfully the property of their parents until they turn 18 or become emancipated. On the other hand, parents can and do make some pretty terrible decisions that affect kids negatively for the rest of their lives.
Why is that?Jaekus wrote:
It's threads like these that make me realise why Jay cops so much shit from other posters sometimes.
I asked him if he was stupid to prove a point. No one thinks that they personally are stupid. So if they aren't stupid, why do they acquiesce to others making their decisions for them?Jaekus wrote:
Calling people stupid, jackasses etc. simply because they hold a different opinion?
And you have to ask why?
Umm, ok
Children are a parents responsibility not property.Jay wrote:
I don't really have an answer for you. On the one hand I feel that children are rightfully the property of their parents until they turn 18 or become emancipated.
That too..DrunkFace wrote:
Children are a parents responsibility not property.Jay wrote:
I don't really have an answer for you. On the one hand I feel that children are rightfully the property of their parents until they turn 18 or become emancipated.
Last edited by Vilham (2012-01-20 06:25:05)
Don't wear a seatbelt, see if I care. Your decision. No one is forcing you so I don't understand why you think this is the case.Jay wrote:
I asked him if he was stupid to prove a point. No one thinks that they personally are stupid. So if they aren't stupid, why do they acquiesce to others making their decisions for them?Jaekus wrote:
Calling people stupid, jackasses etc. simply because they hold a different opinion?
And you have to ask why?
Umm, ok
You know best.AussieReaper wrote:
Suppose it would be the same with motorcyclists needing to wear a helmut.
"But they are only hurting themselves!"
lol
Yes, they are forcing me to wear a seatbelt. If I refuse to do so I'll be fined $185. That's about five hours of time at work for me, might as well toss me in a cell instead.Jaekus wrote:
Don't wear a seatbelt, see if I care. Your decision. No one is forcing you so I don't understand why you think this is the case.Jay wrote:
I asked him if he was stupid to prove a point. No one thinks that they personally are stupid. So if they aren't stupid, why do they acquiesce to others making their decisions for them?Jaekus wrote:
Calling people stupid, jackasses etc. simply because they hold a different opinion?
And you have to ask why?
Umm, ok
Comparing broccoli to seatbelts... if you're having to resort to that kind of argument... especially after a few posts up saying "If you can't sway people to your side of an argument, then you are either shit at arguing or your argument sucks"......................
Well, you decide which of the two it is. Because currently, if anything you've just alienated everyone from your argument that's participated in this thread, from what I have read at least, except for Shifty (LOL)
I can make that claim because it is backed up by evidence.Jay wrote:
You know best.AussieReaper wrote:
Suppose it would be the same with motorcyclists needing to wear a helmut.
"But they are only hurting themselves!"
lol
How does wearing a helmet benefit anyone but the rider?AussieReaper wrote:
I can make that claim because it is backed up by evidence.Jay wrote:
You know best.AussieReaper wrote:
Suppose it would be the same with motorcyclists needing to wear a helmut.
"But they are only hurting themselves!"
lol
You know, how Ted showed seatbelts save lives for other passengers in a car too.
But you just rile against the notion because "freedom".
You really want to see more critical accidents on the roads, forcing hospitals to care for more patients and increasing stress on the health care system?Jay wrote:
How does wearing a helmet benefit anyone but the rider?AussieReaper wrote:
I can make that claim because it is backed up by evidence.Jay wrote:
You know best.
You know, how Ted showed seatbelts save lives for other passengers in a car too.
But you just rile against the notion because "freedom".
That's cool, how about no one wear a seatbelt, more people die and then you can cry about your taxes going up.Jay wrote:
Yes, they are forcing me to wear a seatbelt. If I refuse to do so I'll be fined $185. That's about five hours of time at work for me, might as well toss me in a cell instead.Jaekus wrote:
Don't wear a seatbelt, see if I care. Your decision. No one is forcing you so I don't understand why you think this is the case.Jay wrote:
I asked him if he was stupid to prove a point. No one thinks that they personally are stupid. So if they aren't stupid, why do they acquiesce to others making their decisions for them?
Comparing broccoli to seatbelts... if you're having to resort to that kind of argument... especially after a few posts up saying "If you can't sway people to your side of an argument, then you are either shit at arguing or your argument sucks"......................
Well, you decide which of the two it is. Because currently, if anything you've just alienated everyone from your argument that's participated in this thread, from what I have read at least, except for Shifty (LOL)
Broccoli and seatbelts are indeed in the same realm. The argument for both is hinged on the premise that it is in your best interest to consume the one, and use the other. I can prove without a shadow of a doubt that eating broccoli is beneficial. Why would you be opposed if your government forced you to consume a certain amount of broccoli on a daily or weekly basis? Too far? It's the same thing.
As for who agrees with me, it's generally only Americans on this forum. Foreigners accept that their government will intrude in their lives. We for the most part, do not.
Really? How much abstract money are you willing to trade from the system for your freedoms? Can you even put a dollar figure on how much money helmets save? Whose money do they save? Insurance companies. Same as seat belts.AussieReaper wrote:
You really want to see more critical accidents on the roads, forcing hospitals to care for more patients and increasing stress on the health care system?Jay wrote:
How does wearing a helmet benefit anyone but the rider?AussieReaper wrote:
I can make that claim because it is backed up by evidence.
You know, how Ted showed seatbelts save lives for other passengers in a car too.
But you just rile against the notion because "freedom".
I don't think you understand that the individual choices effect society. Your libertarian "well it only effects me so who cares" argument doesn't hold up to any scrutiny.
The rider could be blinded by dust while riding if you want another example. Dunno what bubble you're living in to think laws were written just to stop your precious choice to live life like a moron.
Anything can be justified by making enough noise about public health concerns.Jaekus wrote:
That's cool, how about no one wear a seatbelt, more people die and then you can cry about your taxes going up.Jay wrote:
Yes, they are forcing me to wear a seatbelt. If I refuse to do so I'll be fined $185. That's about five hours of time at work for me, might as well toss me in a cell instead.Jaekus wrote:
Don't wear a seatbelt, see if I care. Your decision. No one is forcing you so I don't understand why you think this is the case.
Comparing broccoli to seatbelts... if you're having to resort to that kind of argument... especially after a few posts up saying "If you can't sway people to your side of an argument, then you are either shit at arguing or your argument sucks"......................
Well, you decide which of the two it is. Because currently, if anything you've just alienated everyone from your argument that's participated in this thread, from what I have read at least, except for Shifty (LOL)
Broccoli and seatbelts are indeed in the same realm. The argument for both is hinged on the premise that it is in your best interest to consume the one, and use the other. I can prove without a shadow of a doubt that eating broccoli is beneficial. Why would you be opposed if your government forced you to consume a certain amount of broccoli on a daily or weekly basis? Too far? It's the same thing.
As for who agrees with me, it's generally only Americans on this forum. Foreigners accept that their government will intrude in their lives. We for the most part, do not.
Broccoli and seatbelts in the same realm? I can't believe I even am addressing this absurdity. Yes, broccoli is going to save your life. Puh-lease.
I thought you were an adult. "but I don't wanna wear a seatbelt, I don't wanna wear a helmut. I don't wanna eat my broccoli!"Jay wrote:
Really? How much abstract money are you willing to trade from the system for your freedoms? Can you even put a dollar figure on how much money helmets save? Whose money do they save? Insurance companies. Same as seat belts.AussieReaper wrote:
You really want to see more critical accidents on the roads, forcing hospitals to care for more patients and increasing stress on the health care system?Jay wrote:
How does wearing a helmet benefit anyone but the rider?
I don't think you understand that the individual choices effect society. Your libertarian "well it only effects me so who cares" argument doesn't hold up to any scrutiny.
The rider could be blinded by dust while riding if you want another example. Dunno what bubble you're living in to think laws were written just to stop your precious choice to live life like a moron.
If you get into a bad motorcycle accident, you're going to the hospital regardless of if you are wearing a helmet or not.
As for dust, I don't know anyone that rides without some form of eye protection. You've obviously never ridden a motorcycle or you'd know that riding at anything higher than 30 mph without sunglasses, or goggles, or a helmets windscreen is very uncomfortable. You literally have to squint through tearing eyes. No fun.
I hope you like broccoli.
I do all three of those things because I benefit from them, and I am indeed an adult. I don't need someone else holding my hand through life and treating me like a child. If anyone needs to grow up and get off the tit, it's you. You seem terrified that you will make the wrong decisions in life without government guidance. I feel sorry for you.AussieReaper wrote:
I thought you were an adult. "but I don't wanna wear a seatbelt, I don't wanna wear a helmut. I don't wanna eat my broccoli!"
Grow up, mate.
